|
> We have long known that CLL Lojban is not logically unambiguous, is not internally consistent,
What do you mean? Is there something that documents this?
> is not complete,
I agree and would like to help complete it.
> and especially cannot be completed in a coherent way that is consistent with CLL.
I don't know exactly what you mean by "complete". I am talking from a user perspective and I don't see why completing it would cause issues.
Some things I would like to see for completion include:
- full dictionary fully described in Lojban
- complete reference grammar written in Lojban - Lojban words to describe Lojban versions, Lojban grammar, place structures, etc. - full website, available also in pure Lojban, with only official content and process of content approval - user-friendly parsers and grammar-checkers easily available on major platforms - official learning resources tested and refined (and also centralised so there's only one official one of each kind) - translations of core materials (i.e. those mentioned in above dot points) to major/target languages - governance structure in place to produce new Lojban versions - automatic translators (from Lojban into natural languages) available It's a big wishlist, but I don't see how these things would break the grammar. What do you think? From: lojban@googlegroups.com <lojban@googlegroups.com> on behalf of And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 8 November 2017 1:35 AM To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban On 7 November 2017 at 13:49, Timothy Lawrence
<timothy.lawrence@connect.qut.edu.au> wrote:
We have long known that CLL Lojban is not logically unambiguous, is not internally consistent, is not complete, and especially cannot be completed in a coherent way that is consistent with CLL. To the best of my knowledge, nobody who understands and cares
about logic and consistency has ever maintained that CLL Lojban is viable. However, there are people who hold that fidelity to CLL -- and to a standard dialect that emerges spontaneously from CLL-faithful usage -- is of paramount importance, outweighing considerations
of logic and consistency. The community has always been polarized between these two positions; all that has changed is that the former group has grown at the expense of the latter, as the requisite understanding of the logical issues has spread.
--And.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. |